googleeph2 wrote:Lead, did you fault Ferry for the roster before 2010? Or is it hindsight?I am not trying to pick a fight- just curious.

In the future, if the Cavaliers find themselves in the position they were in prior to James' last year,only with another super star, what is the opinion here as to what they should do differently?

Do they go all Cleveland Indians and trade him in order to get value (if he does not re-sign, thereby avoiding free agency)? I know Gilbert didn't have the option to trade James- pr nightmare.

But in Gilbert's mind, what are the lessons learned?

Won't speak for Lead, but I harped on the roster before last season for sure. It was not going to be good enough to win an NBA Title. One star and a bunch of stiffs ,er..., supporting cast is not the recipe. Look around. Find a team that has won a title with the best player on the floor and then none of the next 5 best players on the floor.

The lesson learned, hopefully, is to get more than one stud. No other options.

googleeph2 wrote:Lead, did you fault Ferry for the roster before 2010? Or is it hindsight?I am not trying to pick a fight- just curious.

In the future, if the Cavaliers find themselves in the position they were in prior to James' last year,only with another super star, what is the opinion here as to what they should do differently?

Do they go all Cleveland Indians and trade him in order to get value (if he does not re-sign, thereby avoiding free agency)? I know Gilbert didn't have the option to trade James- pr nightmare.

But in Gilbert's mind, what are the lessons learned?

Won't speak for Lead, but I harped on the roster before last season for sure. It was not going to be good enough to win an NBA Title. One star and a bunch of stiffs ,er..., supporting cast is not the recipe. Look around. Find a team that has won a title with the best player on the floor and then none of the next 5 best players on the floor.

The lesson learned, hopefully, is to get more than one stud. No other options.

This, and to be patient and realistic while doing it. If that guy you really need isn't out there, you don't have to move mountains to grab the best pile of crap that happens to be available.

googleeph2 wrote:Lead, did you fault Ferry for the roster before 2010? Or is it hindsight?I am not trying to pick a fight- just curious.

In the future, if the Cavaliers find themselves in the position they were in prior to James' last year,only with another super star, what is the opinion here as to what they should do differently?

Do they go all Cleveland Indians and trade him in order to get value (if he does not re-sign, thereby avoiding free agency)? I know Gilbert didn't have the option to trade James- pr nightmare.

But in Gilbert's mind, what are the lessons learned?

Obviously never thrilled with it, but not here to acess fault nor blame.

Just calling what is, and what was.

Periodically, on this site, there have been threads that would detail my thoughts. The one for instance, in about Lebron's 3rd or 4th year when someone wanted to tell me the frontcourt (speciafically at that time Z & Drew Gooden) were the reason the Cavs were of to a great start. When, in reality, it was one guy blossoming into a force.

Look, I've already been accused of being off point here. When my point has been very simple all along; Lebron James carried those teams. We're seeing living proof every night. That's all.

And if the Cavs had made a game 7, and Lebron went 6-24, like another league superstar, the Cavs woulda lost (just like they lost every big game he didn't perform well in) and people woulda been baggin' on him, ignoring several other guys who played their usual mediocre to sorry games. Again - they lose that game every time.

Not a popular stance in C-Town these days. But I ain't here to lie to you.

I could care less if Curt Schilling fell of a cliff today. But I'm not gonna say he wasn't a big game pitcher. What we feel is effecting what we saw, or unfortunately, see.

I lean much more to your point Lead (now as opposd to the early season) then the opposite. It is as you said a matter of degree.

I think we see the point that outside Mo Williams, Jamo, and Gibson not a damn thing on this roster is worth a crap. The value of those guys is about above average/nothing special, the rest complete and total dead weight that LeBron allowed to be good at some single aspect. That plus the marginal talent of the above three plus Shaq and DWest, both who would be in the same group, as those three, allowed us to win 50+ games.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Funny I was going to bring up the Heat myself, the extension of Lead's logic on this says that if the Heat win less than 66 games (or 61 to be fair) that LeBron's new supporting cast is no better than his old supporting cast.

Of course that also means I must really think this Cavs team is better than this current Heat team minus LeBron.

OJ it would be 96 wins. But now figure if LeBron is good for 50 wins, Wade is good for 46ish what is Bosh worth 37? That's more than the Cavaliers the past two season, Miami would probably get an automatic #1 like forever.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:Funny I was going to bring up the Heat myself, the extension of Lead's logic on this says that if the Heat win less than 66 games (or 61 to be fair) that LeBron's new supporting cast is no better than his old supporting cast.

Of course that also means I must really think this Cavs team is better than this current Heat team minus LeBron.

OJ it would be 96 wins. But now figure if LeBron is good for 50 wins, Wade is good for 46ish what is Bosh worth 37? That's more than the Cavaliers the past two season, Miami would probably get an automatic #1 like forever.

Wrong.

Again.

An extension of my logic would (and explained in my previous post) would take into account that NOBODY is worth 30-50 games to any team that's worth a shit to begin with.

Very plain. Very simple.

Of course the logic you use here falls right in line with someone who would cull his 18 year old numbers to desperately try to prove a point.

I'd ask again - this time to you directly FUDU; (for about the fourth time inanswered)

The 2oo9-10 Cavaliers won 60 games. The 2010-2011 Cavaliers will struggle to win thirty. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS.

And please, please tell me it's Shaq or Z. Please tell me it's D-Block. More importantly, instead of trying to be funny or making up logic, answer the question.

leadpipe wrote:The 2oo9-10 Cavaliers won 60 games. The 2010-2011 Cavaliers will struggle to win thirty. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS.

And please, please tell me it's Shaq or Z. Please tell me it's D-Block. More importantly, instead of trying to be funny or making up logic, answer the question.

Mike Brown?

Yeah, the guy who people blamed last year will now become the reason, just like Shaq, who everyone said was shot last year (and he was) is a reason.

By the way, personel wise, having Jamison from the beginning of the year (The current Cavs best player) trumps a missing most of the season Shaq, a bat shit crazy West missing every other game at the beginning of the season and Z. You would make that trade every time.

But I'm awaiting the reason and the rationale behind the 30 game difference.

leadpipe wrote:Yeah, the guy who people blamed last year will now become the reason, just like Shaq, who everyone said was shot last year (and he was) is a reason.

So we're basing our opinions on the fans' frustrations with Roker after Bron quit on us last year. Good to know.

All I know is that Mike Brown never had a team outright quit on him in the middle of a season like they've done on Coach 121-63. Or that even in the dark early days of his tenure he never would've let something like 10 out of the last 11 teams drop triple figures on the Cavs. Hell they never did that even during those stretches when Lebron was resting his pinky.

Phil Jackson and his eleven rings say coaching matters in the Association. And for all his faults Mike Brown was a pretty good coach.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

leadpipe wrote:Yeah, the guy who people blamed last year will now become the reason, just like Shaq, who everyone said was shot last year (and he was) is a reason.

So we're basing our opinions on the fans' frustrations with Roker after Bron quit on us last year. Good to know.

All I know is that Mike Brown never had a team outright quit on him in the middle of a season like they've done on Coach 121-63. Or that even in the dark early days of his tenure he never would've let something like 10 out of the last 11 teams drop triple figures on the Cavs. Hell they never did that even during those stretches when Lebron was resting his pinky.

Phil Jackson and his eleven rings say coaching matters in the Association. And for all his faults Mike Brown was a pretty good coach.

During last years playoffs you claimed "Roker not being fired would be the only thing to put me through the roof...."

Phil Jackson and his eleven rings are a perfect example of how coaching matters, but players matter much, much more.

You had problems with Brown in the past few years, not he's the one you're going to grasp onto here?

Oh I think I know the answer. I thought I knew it early in the season when I projected such a fantastic win total that amazed even Peeker. But, damn, I was wrong on that count HUGE. This squad can't punch itself out of a paper bag. It was built as a TRUE supporting cast around a TOP THREE player in the league. When taxed with that job, which was their charge, they performed IMO admirably.

However their were fatal flaws in that mix that were exposed time and time again. Be it the GM, the coach, the supporting cast, or the TOP THREE TALENT. GM for always forcing the next great fit, at the expense of the future perfect fit. He feared the TTT would leave if he did not pursue this avenue; one pushed by ownership. The coach? Been through that too many times. The supporting cast that could ONLY support. The TTT that quit when he realized he would be escaping in a few short months...

Coach is fired, GM resigns, TTT takes his talent to South Beach; all those variables changed. What was left was the supporting cast. How they would perform was an unknown (well at least it wasn't tested with sufficient sample size). We found out what we knew all those years ago. No matter how marginally improved season over season that supporting cast can still ONLY support a top tier talent. They cannot create on their own. Individual guys may benefit somewhat from an expanded role, but on the whole they suck. No DWest or Shaq would change that...

IMO the degree that James or the supporting cast contributed to past seasons is immaterial. This team sucks in the here and now, and nothing short of a top tier talent will change that.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Orenthal wrote:Oh I think I know the answer. I thought I knew it early in the season when I projected such a fantastic win total that amazed even Peeker. But, damn, I was wrong on that count HUGE. This squad can't punch itself out of a paper bag. It was built as a TRUE supporting cast around a TOP THREE player in the league. When taxed with that job, which was their charge, they performed IMO admirably.

However their were fatal flaws in that mix that were exposed time and time again. Be it the GM, the coach, the supporting cast, or the TOP THREE TALENT. GM for always forcing the next great fit, at the expense of the future perfect fit. He feared the TTT would leave if he did not pursue this avenue; one pushed by ownership. The coach? Been through that too many times. The supporting cast that could ONLY support. The TTT that quit when he realized he would be escaping in a few short months...

Coach is fired, GM resigns, TTT takes his talent to South Beach; all those variables changed. What was left was the supporting cast. How they would perform was an unknown (well at least it wasn't tested with sufficient sample size). We found out what we knew all those years ago. No matter how marginally improved season over season that supporting cast can still ONLY support a top tier talent. They cannot create on their own. Individual guys may benefit somewhat from an expanded role, but on the whole they suck. No DWest or Shaq would change that...

IMO the degree that James or the supporting cast contributed to past seasons is immaterial. This team sucks in the here and now, and nothing short of a top tier talent will change that.

Agreed.

And, your last paragraph...in the big picture it is immaterial, but if someone is going to argue that the players James had around him were good, it turns from immaterial to, well, proof.

Again, there's valid questions regarding James. About his leadership, is he truly a championship player...but the fact remains he was worth thirty or so games to THIS team, and those thirty games were possible, and left, because nobody left is that good. Not sure what the harm is for some people to admit this. It's clear to darn near everyone on God's green earth.

FUDU wrote:Funny I was going to bring up the Heat myself, the extension of Lead's logic on this says that if the Heat win less than 66 games (or 61 to be fair) that LeBron's new supporting cast is no better than his old supporting cast.

Of course that also means I must really think this Cavs team is better than this current Heat team minus LeBron.

OJ it would be 96 wins. But now figure if LeBron is good for 50 wins, Wade is good for 46ish what is Bosh worth 37? That's more than the Cavaliers the past two season, Miami would probably get an automatic #1 like forever.

Wrong.

Again.

An extension of my logic would (and explained in my previous post) would take into account that NOBODY is worth 30-50 games to any team that's worth a shit to begin with.

Very plain. Very simple.

Of course the logic you use here falls right in line with someone who would cull his 18 year old numbers to desperately try to prove a point.

I'd ask again - this time to you directly FUDU; (for about the fourth time inanswered)

The 2oo9-10 Cavaliers won 60 games. The 2010-2011 Cavaliers will struggle to win thirty. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS.

And please, please tell me it's Shaq or Z. Please tell me it's D-Block. More importantly, instead of trying to be funny or making up logic, answer the question.

Actually what is interesting Lead is you have pretty much subscribed to almost exactly what I have said all along here the humorous part being I don't think you even realize it, yeah the answer is LeBron James (but then again you seem to be the only person in this thread unaware that nobody has denied that). I mean shit you're doing the math right in front of us, 60 wins with LBJ down to 30 wins w/o LBJ, gee where have I heard that number 30 before...hmmm (to be fair I actually said 33-36 giving even more credit to LeBron). 60-30=30....30 extra wins have to come from somewhere Lead. So which it is he's good for 50 or he's good for 30?

But even still that isn't even the true point of all this, the supporting cast was labeled as garbage, to which some responded that is simply inaccurate, and right now you're doing a fairly decent job of helping us show that. Nothing more nothing less, this team sucks right now, nobody is even attempting to deny that, however you are hell bent on implying that those of us disagreeing you have come out and said LeBron sucks and this team is decent.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:Funny I was going to bring up the Heat myself, the extension of Lead's logic on this says that if the Heat win less than 66 games (or 61 to be fair) that LeBron's new supporting cast is no better than his old supporting cast.

Of course that also means I must really think this Cavs team is better than this current Heat team minus LeBron.

OJ it would be 96 wins. But now figure if LeBron is good for 50 wins, Wade is good for 46ish what is Bosh worth 37? That's more than the Cavaliers the past two season, Miami would probably get an automatic #1 like forever.

Wrong.

Again.

An extension of my logic would (and explained in my previous post) would take into account that NOBODY is worth 30-50 games to any team that's worth a shit to begin with.

Very plain. Very simple.

Of course the logic you use here falls right in line with someone who would cull his 18 year old numbers to desperately try to prove a point.

I'd ask again - this time to you directly FUDU; (for about the fourth time inanswered)

The 2oo9-10 Cavaliers won 60 games. The 2010-2011 Cavaliers will struggle to win thirty. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS.

And please, please tell me it's Shaq or Z. Please tell me it's D-Block. More importantly, instead of trying to be funny or making up logic, answer the question.

Actually what is interesting Lead is you have pretty much subscribed to almost exactly what I have said all along here the humorous part being I don't think you even realize it, yeah the answer is LeBron James (but then again you seem to be the only person in this thread unaware that nobody has denied that). I mean shit you're doing the math right in front of us, 60 wins with LBJ down to 30 wins w/o LBJ, gee where have I heard that number 30 before...hmmm (to be fair I actually said 33-36 giving even more credit to LeBron). 60-30=30....30 extra wins have to come from somewhere Lead. So which it is he's good for 50 or he's good for 30?

But even still that isn't even the true point of all this, the supporting cast was labeled as garbage, to which some responded that is simply inaccurate, and right now you're doing a fairly decent job of helping us show that. Nothing more nothing less, this team sucks right now, nobody is even attempting to deny that, however you are hell bent on implying that those of us disagreeing you have come out and said LeBron sucks and this team is decent.

Your first paragraph, I understand you're trying to be cute and condescending with the geeees and the simple math, which is great, but other than that, I can't say I understand what the hell your point is. I trust you aren't too stupid to realize how many wins he's worth is dependant on what team, correct?

As far as the second paragraph, the supporting cast was not labeled garbage at the beginning of the season, or the beginning of this thread. The only reason I called is because I couldn't understand why anyone with their eyes open saw any different. On TV every night, is what it is. Not some sort of conspiracy tied to Lebron, or any other nonsense. I said the players were bad. Others thought not so much. And that's all.